A Letter to the Editors ofYuzhny Rabochy[1]

DearComrades,

Yourdetailed letter has greatly gladdened us all. Please send us the
      promised supplement as soon as possible, and write oftener. We hope soon
      to send one of the comrades to you for more detailed and final talks;
      meanwhile we shall confine ourselves to the most important points.

Youare right a thousand times over when you say that we must unite as
      soon as possible, indeed immediately, in a single all-Russian
      organisation, whose aim would be to prepare the ground for ideological
      unity among the committees and for the practical, organisational unity of
      the Party. We, for our part, have already taken a number of fairly
      important steps in this direction, thanks to the fact that the
      St. Petersburg Committee has come over fully to theIskrapoint
      of view, published a statement to this effect, andde facto(this, of course, is strictlyentre

	nous[Between us.—Ed.])

      merged with theIskraorganisation in Russia, and given its
      members very influential places in the committee’s central group. If we
      succeed in getting the same complete solidarity and complete fusion with
      the South, the actual unification of the Party will be three-quarters on
      the way to accomplishment. This must be pushed ahead as fast as
      possible. We are taking steps immediately, first, to see to it that
      members of theIskraorganisation in Russia visit you for the
      purpose of coming to an agreement; second, to establish connections here
      with Chernyshov. For your part, hurry up the release (or publication inIskra) of your statement ofprinciples, fully defining your position in the Party, and take all steps
      towards actual fusion with theIskraorganisation in Russia.

Inconclusion, a few words on the questions you have raised. Regarding the
      peasantry and the agrarian programme, we are not clear on precisely what
      you find unsatisfactory in our draft agrarian programme and what changes
      you would like. Let us know this more concretely. Have you seen No. 4 ofZaryawith the article on the agrarian

      programme? [See pp. 107-50 of this
	volume.—Ed.]

      In general, your remarks about the mistakes made byIskrashow
      how important it is for us to communicate more frequently and regularly so
      as to achieve complete harmony. We have so devilishly few forces that only
      the closest unity ofallSocial-Democrats can ensure us success
      in the struggle against both the “adventurers” and the
      government. And yet we hitherto knew almost nothing about your standpoint,
      for instance, or about your practical work—is that normal? Besides,
      is it normal that you, for instance, are now taking steps on your own to
      establish permanent transport connections, while we are doing it likewise
      on our own? (Let us know in greater detail what steps you are taking, how
      and where, what are the means you have, etc.) This same circumstance,
      i.e., the shortage of forces, should be taken into account in considering
      the question of a special press organ, of continuing the publication ofYuzhny Rabochy, of changing it toRussky Rabochy. We
      must weigh all aspects of the matter with the utmost care. Just consider
      where we are to get the forces for two papers, when we know very well that
      we have not enough even for one. Won’t you be giving St. Petersburg (the
      non-Iskra-ist elements in St. Petersburg) a stimulus to publishRabochaya Myslalso as an “explanatory,” popular, etc.,
      paper? And this at a time when St. Petersburg is preparing to discontinueRabochaya Mysland at last get down to real work onIskra.Won’t your efforts to arrange regular contributions toIskrafrom Russia suffer as a result of your plans—and you
      know that without this collaborationIskracannot become a
      genuine Party organ; don’t forget either that, except for you, we have
      practically no one in view for this work. And if theIskra-istsdon’t take this in hand, who will do so, and when? Finally, thrash out
      more thoroughly the question of whether the purposes of explanatory,
      propagandist, popular literature meant for the “average
      worker” (as you put it) are compatible with the purposes of a
      newspaper. That there must be literature specially designed for the
      average worker and the masses is indisputable; but this can be only in the
      form of leaflets and pamphlets, since it isimpossiblefor a
      newspaper properly toexplain everyquestion to the aver age
      worker. For this we must begin from thebeginning, with the ABC,
      and go straight through to the end, carefully and thorougly examining all
      aspects of a question. A newspaper would scarcely be in a position to do
      this even if it were as sured of ideal conditions with regard to literary
      forces. Don’t forget, lastly, that what you do, whether you desire it or
      not, will be of all-Russian importance, and that all talk, notions, and
      theories aboutspecialpapers “for the
      intelligentsia” and “for the workers” may play a most
      pernicious part, not only irrespectively of your desires, but even despite
      anything you may do to counteract it personally. After all, there is only
      a handful like you among the Russian Social-Democrats, while among the
      mass of the Russian Social-Democrats there is still a very great deal of
      narrow-mindedness of all kinds. We do not, of course, intend to limit
      ourselves to these cursory remarks on a question of such importance, but
      we only ask you not to unduly hasten your decision, and to discuss the
      matter from all angles. We consider it evendesirableto preserve
      a separate group (the Editorial Board ofYuzhny Rabochy) at least
      until the Party congress, but this group should not be in a hurry with its
      paper.

[1]Yuzhny Rabochy (Southern Worker)—a Social-Democratic news
      paper, published illegally from January 1900 to April 1903 by a group of
      this name. Twelve numbers were issued. I. K. Lala yants, A. Vilensky
      (“Ilya”), 0. A. Kogan (Yermansky), B. S. Tseitlin (Batursky),
      E. Y. and E. S. Levin, V. N. Rozanov, and others were at various times
      editors and contributors.

YuzhnyRabochystarted as the “Ekaterinoslav Workers’ News
      paper” (the subtitle of the first two issues), and soon became an
      influential “organ of the working-class movement in South Russia.”
      The location of the newspaper’s print-shop was continually changed, being
      at different times in Ekaterinoslav, Sine lensk, Kishinev, Nikolayev, and
      elsewhere....

YuzhnyRabochyopposed “economism” and terrorism and
      upheld the need to develop a mass revolutionary movement. But, in
      opposition to theIskraplan of creating in Russia a centralised
      Marxist party round an all-Russian political newspaper, theYuzhny
      Rabochygroup put forward a plan for restoring the R.S.D.L.P. by
      creating regional Social-Democratic associations. A practical attempt to
      realise this plan was made through convocation of the conference of
      committees and organisations of the R.S.D.L.P. in South Russia in December
      1901, at which the League of Southern Committees and Organisations of the
      R.S.D.L.P. was formed, withYuzhny Rabochyas its organ. The
      attempt proved impracticable (as was the entire organisational plan ofYuzhny Rabochy) and after the mass police raids in the spring of
      1902, the League disintegrated. In August 1902, those members ofYuzhny Rabochy’sEditorial Board who were at large entered into
      negotiations with theIskraEditorial Board on joint work to
      restore the unity of Russian Social-Democracy. The declaration of theYuzhny Rabochygroup on solidarity withIskra(published
      inIskra, No. 27, November 1, 1902, and inYuzhny
      Rabochy, No. 10, December 1902) was of great importance in
      consolidating the Social-Democratic forces in Russia. In November 1902,
      theYuzhny Rabochygroup, together with the RussianIskraorganisation, the St. Petersburg Committee of the
      R.S.D.L.P. and the Northern League of the R.S.D.L.P. participated in
      restoring the Organising Committee and in its activities in convening the
      Second Party Congress.

TheYuzhny Rabochygroup conducted extensive revolutionary work
      in Russia, but at the same time it displayed opportunist tendencies in
      deciding the question of the attitude to the liberal bourgeoisie and to
      the peasant movement, and hatched a separatist plan to set up an
      all-Russian newspaper parallel toIskra.

Atthe Second Congress of the R.S.D.L.P., theYuzhny Rabochydelegates adopted a “Centre” position (Lenin called the
      representatives of the Centre “opportunist middlemen”). The Second
      Congress decided to dissolve theYuzhny Rabochygroup as well as
      all separate Social-Democratic groups and organisations.